.

BRAZEN ATTACK ON INTERNATIONAL LAW

.

BRAZEN ATTACK ON INTERNATIONAL LAW

BY THE ISRAELI REGIME

AND THE UNITED STATES

VIS-À-VIS THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN

 THROUGH THEIR ACTS OF AGGRESSION

OF 13-24 JUNE 2025:

1. On the early morning of 13 June 2025, the Zionist regime led by a war criminal under arrest warrant of the ICC launched, in an egregious act of aggression, unprovoked armed attacks against the Islamic Republic of Iran in blatant defiance of the Charter of the United Nations and basic principles of international law.
2. As a result of deliberate targeting of, and directing attacks against, civilians in densely populated areas, hundreds of civilians including women, children, scientists, elites, and university lecturers as well as senior military officers of State outside active hostilities lost their lives, and thousands of civilians were injured.
3. The US, a permanent member of the UNSC, in full complicity with the aggressor Israeli regime carried out a series of attacks against the IAEA-safeguarded peaceful nuclear facilities of Iran in Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan in a manifest act of aggression and in blatant violation of Article 2 (4) of the UN Charter.

[1] The present report is prepared with the aim of updating the initial report issued by the Islamic republic of Iran on illustrating instances of violations of international law by the Zionist regime against the Islamic Republic of Iran between 13 and 24 June 2025. It also encompasses the act of aggression carried out by the US on 22 June 2025 in violation of the territorial integrity and political independence of the Islamic Republic of Iran in support of the Zionist regime.

Part I. VIOLATION OF THE PEREMPTORY NORM OF THE “PROHIBITION OF AGGRESSION”

1. In 1945, the Charter of the United Nations was adopted in the aftermath of the Second World War, firmly rejecting the use of force as a means of settling international disputes. Article 2(4) of the Charter imposes a binding obligation on all Member States to refrain in their international relations from “the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations”. This, recognized as the peremptory norm of “prohibition of aggression”, has formed the cornerstone of international relations ever since.
2. The peremptory norm of “prohibition of aggression” is grounded in its universal acceptance and non-derogable character. The ILC has confirmed this in ARSIWA, noting in Article 40 that breaches of peremptory norms – such as prohibition of aggression constitute “serious breaches of obligations arising under peremptory norms of general international law”.[1] The ICJ, in Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (1986), affirmed that the prohibition of the use of force under Article 2(4) of the UN Charter is part of customary international law and applies independently of treaty obligations.[2] Similarly, in its Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory advisory opinion (2004), the Court held that “the obligations violated by Israel include certain obligations erga omnes”[3] and that these, in turn, include the prohibition of use of force which has been endorsed again by the Court in its 2024 Advisory opinion of 19 July 2024 on the Legal Consequences arising from the Policies and Practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.[4]
3. The ILC’s 2022 Draft Conclusions on Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens) further confirm that the prohibition of aggression is a peremptory norm, and that serious breaches of such norms give rise to obligations on all States not to recognize as lawful a situation created by breach of this peremptory norm nor render aid or assistance in maintaining such a situation.[5]
4. The United Nations Security Council,[6] the General Assembly[7] and the ICJ,[8] for their part, have addressed the unlawful use of force within the scope of their respective mandates.
5. The UNGA has elaborated the key principles in relation to the prohibition on the use of force in several resolutions such as “Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States” (A/RES/2131 (XX), 1965), the “Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations” (A/RES/2625 (XXV), 1970), and the “Definition of Aggression” (A/RES/3314 (XXIX), 1974), all of which have been adopted by consensus. For instance, Article 5 (2) of resolution 2625 (XXV) of 1970 prohibits the threat or use of force and explicitly states that a war of aggression is a crime against international peace, for which there is responsibility under international law.[9]
6. More specifically, the unlawful use of force by the Israeli regime and the United States constitute an egregious crime of aggression within the meaning of Article 3 of the Annex of the UN General Assembly Resolution 3314 (XXIX) on “Definition of Aggression”. Accordingly, the “invasion” of Iran “by the armed forces” of the Israeli regime and the United States; “the bombardment” and “the use of weapons against the territory” of Iran; “attack” on its “land” and “air forces”; as well as deployment of agents, “which carry out acts of armed force against” Iran “of such gravity as to amount to the acts listed above, or its substantial involvement therein”, all qualify as acts of aggression.[10]
7. Article 5(1) of the above is also crystal clear in stipulating that “no consideration of whatever nature, whether political, economic, military or otherwise, may serve as a justification for aggression”. This is echoed, as well, in Resolution 42/22 (1987), which reaffirms that States must refrain from the threat or use of force under any circumstances, and condemns attempts to justify aggression under the guise of self-defense or political necessity.[11]
8. In the same context, lame justifications for aggression against a State under any fabricated nomenclature, such as the so-called “preemptive self-defense”[12] or other excuses in terms of anticipatory attacks has no place in international law, and Article 51 of the UN Charter limits the right of self-defense to situations where an armed attack has occurred against another State. Likewise, deliberate targeting of Iran’s civilian nuclear infrastructure under the false pretense of preemptive self-defense threatens international peace and security and undermines the non-proliferation regime as a whole.
9. In this context, invocation of Article 51 is not only irrelevant, but also a gross distortion of international law and the UN Charter. Article 51 provides for the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense only if an armed attack has occurred. UNGA Resolution 3314 and the jurisprudence of ICJ in 1986 Nicaragua case (Nicaragua vs. United States of America) and 2003 Oil Platforms case (Islamic Republic of Iran vs. United States of America) affirm that the right of self-defense can only be invoked in response to an armed attack and may only be invoked when conditions of necessity and proportionality are met.[13]
10. It follows that on 13 June 2025 the Israeli terrorist regime, later joined by the United States on 22 June 2025 constitute acts of aggression against the Islamic Republic of Iran.
11. Over the course of the attacks, the agents of the Israeli regime conducted deliberate strikes – by day and night – against densely populated civilian areas across multiple major cities. Alongside senior officials, they also targeted civilian population among them women and children (including infants and toddlers), and ordinary citizens from all walks of life such as scientists, university professors, students, physicians, artists, and athletes. Civilian objects including residential areas, homes, hospitals, public facilities, and critical infrastructure were damaged or destroyed, and entire families were perished in these attacks. Between 13 and 24 June 2025, these assaults claimed hundreds of civilian lives and left more than a thousand injured, inflicting severe harm on both the civilian population and civilian objects and infrastructure.
12. Such brazen lawlessness does not surprise anyone as the genocidal regime has demonstrated since its illegitimate inception to the present day, the total disdain and animosity towards international law, the Charter of the United Nations and the very principal organs of the United Nations including the ICJ.

Part II. IRAN’S RIGHT TO SELF-DEFENSE IN RESPONSE TO THE AGGRESSIONS

13. In the exercise of its inherent right of self-defense, as enshrined in Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, the Islamic Republic of Iran undertook a series of carefully calibrated defensive operations against military targets and infrastructure belonging to the Israeli regime and the US forces engaged in the aggression. These operations were conducted following the aggressive armed attacks by the Israeli regime and the US between 13 and 24 June 2025, which resulted in extensive loss of civilian lives and severe damage to Iran’s critical infrastructure, including peaceful nuclear facilities.
14. Iran’s defensive measures were necessary, proportionate, and targeted at military objectives. These responses were carried out with the utmost restraint and precision, in full accordance with international law, and aimed at deterring further aggression, protecting the civilian population, and preserving regional stability. The actions were taken only after the failure of the United Nations Security Council to act decisively in response to the armed attacks.
15. In accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter, the Islamic Republic of Iran formally notified the Security Council of the armed attacks carried out by both the Israeli regime[14] and the US,[15] and of Iran’s exercise of its inherent right of self-defense under international law. These notifications emphasized the scale, nature, and consequences of the aggression, and documented the internationally wrongful acts committed against Iran’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, and civilian population.
16. In letters addressed to the President of the Security Council and the Secretary-General, Iran underlined that the armed strikes by the Israeli regime and the US constituted a blatant violation of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter and the fundamental principles of international law prohibiting the use of force.
17. Iran called upon the Security Council to condemn these acts of aggression and to take all necessary measures under Chapter VII of the UN Charter to hold the perpetrators accountable, prevent the recurrence of such violations, and uphold the collective security framework of the United Nations.
18. Despite formal requests from several Member States, including Russia, China, Algeria, and Pakistan, urging the Security Council to fulfil its mandate to maintain international peace and security, the Council once again failed to take meaningful action, effectively enabling further transgressions by the Israeli regime and the US. This inaction further undermined the credibility of the UN system and forced Iran to act in self-defense to protect its people and sovereignty.
19. Under these grave circumstances, and in the absence of any protective measure by the UN- Security Council, the Islamic Republic of Iran had no alternative but to invoke and exercise its inherent right to self-defense against coordinated acts of aggression. This position was consistently communicated in Iran’s official correspondence to the United Nations.
20. As a committed Member of the United Nations, Iran remains fully aligned with the principles and purposes of the UN Charter, including the peaceful resolution of disputes and the maintenance of international peace and security.
21. Iran has never sought escalation, nor has it ever wished to expand the conflict in the region. However, it reaffirms its unwavering resolve to take defensive measures against any aggression against its sovereignty, territorial integrity, and the safety of its people.

Part III. VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW

22. The large-scale unprovoked acts of aggression of the Israeli regime and the US against the sovereignty, territorial integrity, civilian population, and infrastructure of the Islamic Republic of Iran, beginning on 13 June 2025, and coming to a cease on 24 June 2025, saw a series of violation of fundamental principles of international humanitarian law some constituting grave breaches warranting war crimes.
23. This imposed, aggressive international armed conflict led to significant loss of civilian lives and destruction of civilian objects, including infrastructure essential to civilian life requiring scrutiny of the same in the light of respective principles and norms of international humanitarian law. This section provides a glimpse of these violations, following a brief chronological overview of the attacks and a recounting of official casualty figures.

A) Chronological Overview of Attacks on Civilians and Civilian Objects by the Aggressors

24. In the course of the aggression against Iranian territory, numerous attacks were directed at civilians and civilian infrastructure. Below is a chronological sequence of selected incidents that illustrate the scale and nature of these attacks.

(1) Friday, 13 June 2025

25. On 13 June 2025, multiple regions in Iran were subjected to widespread aerial attacks by the Israeli regime, resulting in significant civilian casualties and damage to infrastructure. In Tehran’s Shahid Chamran residential area, a 14-story building was completely destroyed, leaving 60 residents dead, including 20 children.[16] Among the victims was a two-month-old infant, Rayan Ghasemian.[17] His family suffered severe burn injuries ranging from 40% to 80% TBSA, and all but the five-year-old sibling died from their wounds.[18] The child survived, gravely injured and orphaned, becoming a harrowing symbol of the indiscriminate nature of the attack.
26. Hakim Children’s Hospital in Tehran was also targeted.[19] While the attack did not result in fatalities, it prompted serious concern due to its focus on a pediatric medical facility. Elsewhere in East Azerbaijan Province, 11 locations were struck, including sites around Tabriz, in Bostan Abad and Maragheh counties, as well as part of the runway at Shahid Madani Airport. The strikes killed 18 people and injured 35.[20] One Iranian Red Crescent Society member was also martyred while responding to the emergency.[21]
27. Additional attacks were recorded in Ilam Province, specifically in Ilam, Mehran, and Dehloran, resulting in the destruction of several buildings.[22] Yet it was not just homes or airports that came under assault. Three of Iran’s nuclear sites—Natanz Fuel Enrichment Plant,[23] Isfahan Nuclear Technology Center,[24] and Arak Heavy Water Production Plant[25]—were struck. These facilities are officially designated as peaceful and subject to international oversight, yet they were hit with no regard for the potential consequences, sparking concern among global observers about escalation and the safety of surrounding civilian population.
28. In Ardabil Province, an airstrike on the Khorsolow telecommunications site in Bilesavar injured two civilians.[26] Meanwhile, in Kermanshah Province, missile strikes hit buildings affiliated with the State Welfare Organization and the Arbaeen Headquarters at the Khosravi border in Ghasr-e-Shirin, killing one person and injuring 24[27] —facilities dedicated to supporting people with disabilities, single mothers, and low-income families. Both buildings were destroyed.[28]

(2) Saturday, 14 June 2025

29. On 14 June 2025, the Israeli regime carried out multiple strikes against civilian and public infrastructure in Iran. From the early morning hours, Mehrabad International Airport in Tehran—a civilian airport—was repeatedly targeted.[29] In Abadan, the Martyr Monument of Shahid Tondgooyan was also struck.[30] Missile attacks deliberately hit Malek Ashtar University in Tehran[31] and a private automobile manufacturing plant in Boroujerd known as Farda Motors.[32]
30. In a particularly tragic incident, an ambulance operating in West Azerbaijan province was directly targeted, resulting in the loss of two lives.[33] Emergency responders, often the first to assist others, became victims themselves—a reminder of how deeply indiscriminate strikes reach into even the most humanitarian corners.

(3) Sunday, 15 June 2025

31. On 15 June 2025, the Israeli regime conducted a series of coordinated and indiscriminate strikes across several provinces in Iran. A drone attack targeted a student dormitory on Keshavarz Boulevard in Tehran, partially collapsing the building[34] and injuring five foreign medical students — young lives caught in the crossfire of indiscriminate aggression.[35] Simultaneously, missiles struck key energy facilities—including the Phase 14 platform of the South Pars gas field, the Fajr Jam refinery in Bushehr province,[36] and fuel depots in southern and western Tehran—resulting in a power outage across the Shahran neighborhood.[37] One of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs buildings also sustained damage, with civilians injured on-site.[38]
32. Commercial and industrial facilities were also impacted, including the Shahr-e-Farsh carpet mall in Isfahan[39] and Tehran’s Kimidaroo pharmaceutical factory, laid bare the targeting of everyday life.[40]
33. In Kermanshah, the brutality escalated. Further damage on this day, where missile strikes hit two stables at a horse-breeding center located in the Olympic Village. Approximately 50 horses—primarily used in breeding programs, national training, and competitive events—were killed.[41] The attack also destroyed two warehouses operated by private sector clubs within the village, and a security guard stationed at the site sustained injuries.[42] More tragically, in the same assault, sections of Imam Reza Hospital were severely damaged, further impacting medical services in the region.[43]
34. In Tehran’s Tajrish neighborhood on 15 June 2025, two separate airstrikes caused widespread civilian harm. One missile struck a residential building, while the other hit one of the city’s busiest intersections, rupturing a main water pipe.[44] The attacks left 59 civilians wounded and resulted in 12 deaths, including a pregnant woman.[45] As if to deepen the anguish, the Israeli regime’s attacks also extended to Shahid Hasheminejad International Airport in Mashhad, highlighting the broad impact on civilian infrastructure.[46]

[1] Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its fifty-third session (23 April-1 June and 2 July-10 August 2001) UN Doc A/56/10 (2001).

[2] Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Merits, Judgment, ICJ Reports 1986, p. 14, at paras. 188–190.

[3] Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, ICJ Reports 2004, p. 136, at paras. 155-159.

[4] Legal Consequences arising from the Policies and Practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, Advisory Opinion, ICJ Reports 2024, at para. 274.

[5] Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its Seventy-third session (18 April–3 June and 4 July–5 August 2022) UN Doc A/77/10 (2001).

[6] Including but not limited to S/RES 326 (02 February 1973), S/RES 386 (17 March 1976), S/RES 411 (30 June 1977), S/RES 423 (14 March 1978), S/RES 424 (17 March 1978), S/RES 445 (08 March 1979), and S/RES 455 (23 November 1979) in the situation of Southern Rhodesia, where the Security Council condemned military incursions and cross-border aggression by the illegal regime in Rhodesia; S/RES 418 (04 November 1977) in the situation of South Africa, where it condemned South Africa’s acts of aggression and imposed a mandatory arms embargo; S/RES 405 (14 April 1977) and S/RES 419 (24 November 1977) in the situation of Benin, where it condemned the attempted mercenary coup as an act of armed aggression; S/RES 573 (04 October 1985) and S/RES 611 (25 April 1988) in the situation of Tunisia, where it condemned the Israeli regime’s air strikes on Tunisia as acts of aggression; S/RES 487 (19 June 1981) in the situation of Iraq, where it condemned the Israeli regime’s attack on Iraq’s nuclear reactor as a violation of international law; S/RES 672 (12 October 1990), S/RES 673 (24 October 1990), S/RES 681 (20 December 1990), and S/RES 684 (28 January 1991) in the situation of Palestine, where the Council condemned the use of force by the Israeli regime in the occupied territories; S/RES 262 (31 December 1968), S/RES 265 (01 April 1969), and S/RES 273 (23 July 1969) regarding Middle East conflicts, where it condemned aggressive acts by the Israeli regime , including bombardments and military operations; and S/RES 178 (24 April 1963), S/RES 204 (19 May 1965), and S/RES 268 (28 July 1969) regarding African complaints (Senegal, Guinea, Zambia), where the Council condemned acts of aggression by Portugal and South Africa against neighboring African states.

[7] Including but not limited to A/RES/ES-8/2 (14 September 1981) [Emergency Special Session], in the situation of Namibia, where the General Assembly declared South Africa’s occupation of Namibia and its acts of aggression against neighboring states as illegal aggression; A/RES/40/97(A) (14 December 1985), in the situation of South Africa, where it condemned South Africa’s persistent acts of aggression, including its occupation of Namibia and cross-border attacks; A/RES/2918 (XXVII) (22 November 1972), in the situation of Territories under Portuguese administration, where the Assembly, while referring to Security Council Resolution 322 (1972), urged Portugal to cease military repression in its colonies, denouncing aggressive colonial military action; A/RES/ES-10/2 (7 October 2000) and subsequent resolutions of the Tenth Emergency Special Session, in the context of the Middle East, where the Assembly demanded an immediate end to the Israeli regime military incursions and violence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including condemnation of armed attacks by the Israeli regime; and A/RES/46/242 (14 August 1992), among other resolutions in 1992, in the situation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, where the General Assembly condemned Serbian forces’ aggression and territorial violations during the Bosnian war, affirming support for Bosnia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

[8] Including but not limited to Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) (1986), where the Court held that the U.S. violated customary international law prohibiting the use of force and intervention, affirming Article 2(4) of the UN Charter and clarifying the criteria for self-defense; Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda) (2005), where Uganda was found to have committed acts of aggression and violated the territorial integrity of the DRC; Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America) (2003), where the Court ruled that the U.S. failed to justify its use of force under self-defense, reinforcing the principles of necessity and proportionality; Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (2004), where the ICJ found that the Israeli regime’s construction of the wall violated Article 2(4) and constituted an unlawful use of force in occupied territory; and the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (1996), which reaffirmed the prohibition of the threat or use of force as a fundamental norm of international law.

[9] See also: A/RES/37/10 (30 November 1982), the “Manila Declaration on the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes”, in which the General Assembly reaffirmed the prohibition on the use of force and emphasized the obligation of States to settle their disputes through peaceful means in accordance with the UN Charter; A/RES/42/22 (18 November 1987), the “Declaration on the Enhancement of the Effectiveness of the Principle of Refraining from the Threat or Use of Force in International Relations”, which strengthened the commitment to the non-use of force and reaffirmed that no consideration of any kind may be invoked to justify aggression; and A/RES/43/51 (5 December 1988), the “Declaration on the Prevention and Removal of Disputes and Situations Which May Threaten International Peace and Security and on the Role of the United Nations in this Field”, which urged States to take early preventive measures and emphasized the central role of the United Nations in resolving and removing threats to peace.

[10] It must be emphasized that in accordance with Article 1 of this resolution, the use of the term “State” in the definition of “aggression” : is (1) “without prejudice to questions of recognition or to whether a State is a member of the United Nations”; and (2) “includes the concept of a ‘group of States’ where appropriate.” Hence, this terminology should neither be read as, nor construed to be, inconsistent with Iran’s longstanding stance regarding not recognizing the Zionist regime’s legitimacy as a State.

[11] UN General Assembly, Declaration on the Enhancement of the Effectiveness of the Principle of Refraining from the Threat or Use of Force in International Relations, GA Res 42/22, UN Doc A/RES/42/22 (18 November 1987).

[12]

[13] The Non-Aligned Movement – representing over half of the world’s States – explicitly rejected broad interpretations of Article 51, which would justify anticipatory armed attacks, at its 2019 ministerial meeting. See NAM Final Document no.2019/CoB/Doc.1, “Ministerial Meeting of the Coordinating Bureau of the Non-Aligned Movement (CoB-NAM)”, paras. 39.2 & 40.6. (13 June 2025), .

[14] UN Doc S/2025/379, “Letter dated 13 June 2025 from the Permanent Representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General and the President of the Security Council”, .

[15] UN Doc S/2025/405, “Letter dated 22 June 2025 from the Permanent Representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General and the President of the Security Council”, .

[16] Donya-e-Eqtesad (Persian), “20 children killed in Israeli attack on Shahid Chamran residential area in Tehran”, , (14.06.2025).

[17] IRNA (Persian), “Funeral of the two-month-old martyr ‘Rayan Ghasemian’”, , (19.06.2025).

[18] Donya-e-Eqtesad (Persian), “Minister of Health visits the surviving 5-year-old child of the family of martyr Rayan Ghasemian”, , (08.07.2025).

[19] Tasnim News Agency (Persian), “Israeli drone hits Hakim Children’s Hospital in Tehran”, , (14.06.2025).

[20]

IRNA (Persian), “11 points were attacked in East Azerbaijan/Crisis Management Announcement”, , (13.06.2025).

[21] BBC News, “Live coverage and updates”, , (14.07.2025).

[22] Entekhab (Persian), “Details of Israeli attack on 4 locations in Ilam”, , (13.06.2025).

[23] IRNA (Persian), “Damage has been caused to various parts of the Shahid Ahmadi Roshan enrichment complex”, , (13.06.2025).

[24] IRNA (Persian), “Isfahan’s Shahid Raisi Power Plant Targeted”, , (13.06.2025).

[25] Fararu (Persian), “The attack on Khondab in Markazi Province was also confirmed”, , (13.06.2025).

[26] IRNA (Persian), “Khorsolow telecommunications site attacked in Bile Saver”, , (13.06.2025).

[27] Mashregh News (Persian), “Several women and children martyred in attacks on residential areas”, , (14.06.2025).

[28]ISNA (Persian), “Funeral of the martyr of the Zionist regime attack in Qasr-e-Shirin”, , (16.06.2025).

 

[29] Tabnak (Persian), “Details of the explosion at Mehrabad Airport”, , (14.06.2025).

[30] IRNA (Persian), “Abadan’s Martyr’s Monument Targeted by Zionist Regime Attack”, , (14.06.2025).

[31] Fararu (Persian), “All neighborhoods in Tehran that were attacked/June 15, 2021”, , (15.06.2025).

[32] Nour News (Persian), “Israeli missile attack on the “Farda Motors” factory in Boroujerd”, , (14.06.2025).

[33] Tasnim News Agency (Persian), “Direct Israeli attacks on an ambulance”, , (14.06.2025).

[34] Borna News (Persian), “The Israeli regime attacked a student dormitory in Tehran”, , (15.06.2025).

[35] ISNA (Persian), “5 foreign medical students in Tehran injured in Israeli attack”, , (15.06.2025).

[36] Donya-e-Eqtesad (Persian), “Israel’s brutal attack on Tehran’s Narmak”, , (15.06.2025).

[37] Nour News (Persian), “Fire broke out last night in two fuel storage tanks in Tehran”, , (15.06.2025).

[38] Tabnak (Persian), “Attack on part of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs buildings”, , (15.06.2025).

[39] Mehr News (Persian), “A shopping mall in Isfahan was attacked by the Israeli regime”, , (15.06.2025).

[40] Student News Network (Persian), “Deliberate attack by the Zionist regime on the Kimidaroo factory in the Tehran-Pars neighborhood of Tehran”, , (16.06.2025).

[41] Nour News (Persian), “Cowardly attack on Kermanshah stables; defenseless horses victims of Zionist madness”, , (15.06.2025).

[42] Entekhab (Persian), “Pictures: Israeli attack on 2 horse breeding stables in Kermanshah”, , (15.06.2025).

[43] Etemad Online (Persian), “Israeli attack on horse stables in Kermanshah”, , (15.06.2025).

[44] Mashregh News (Persian), “Images of the Israeli attack on private cars and the explosion of a water pipe in Tajrish + video”, , (03.07.2025).

[45] Asr-e-Iran (Persian), “Health Minister: At least 1,800 injured in Zionist regime attacks/Pregnant mother martyred in attack on Quds Square in Tajrish (Video)”, , (16.06.2025).

[46] Donya-e-Eqtesad (Persian), “Urgent/ Explosion at Shahid Hasheminejad Airport in Mashhad + Details”, , (15.06.2025).